Greg Hudson wrote:
> A distributed version control system might work very poorly when off the
> net, e.g. if it frequently has to go off and contact other people's
> repostories in order to provide history information. A centralized
> version control system might work very well when off the net, e.g. if
> you keep a cached copy of the whole repository. Two very different axes
> of functionality.

Except SVK allows me to have a full mirror of the main repo, so it is
not "distributed" in the sense you are using. SVK really is a
disconnected Subversion client and if Subversion grew that capability
natively, I'd be a happy camper because it is a very nice way to work.

I'm not trying to evangelize about SVK (and I've been using Subversion
longer than I have been using SVK). I am also one of the primary voices
of caution against moving the Perl repo to a Git backend, so I am
automatically biased against Git... ;-)